I will concur on the directive of saying without content for saying. I despise those times when I hear so much, yet there is nothing to comprehend. At the least, silence might imply that a formulation of intelligence may be occuring. But then the saying starts again and sinks that theory. So much of the saying is driven by ego, that the saying itself says a lot about what the ego can never say which would be to say its truth that there is nothing to say at all!

Right on the money Stu. At least you have got your act together.

I always say. No matter if I have anything to say or not. I always say....and I think everyone else should, too.

Sure no one should be afraid to say what is on their minds, at least within extremes I would think. Openness and honesty are in that regard very fine assets everyone should cherish.

Because I relate everything to music, I will use an example from music. King Crimson guitarist Robert Fripp is a sort of intellectual you don't see in music often, and would be more comfortable teaching at a university than on stage. Nevertheless, he has formulated many theories and ideas about music and the importance of silence. He says that when given a chance to jump in, you should instead listen. By listening, you increase the chance that you will learn and will also allow space for others to do their part. In other words, say something only if you have something important to say, something that moves the conversation (or song) forward. Gratuitously speaking or playing only takes the topic backwards. If everyone involved were to follow this, less people would say thoughtless things. Or make thoughtless music. I tend to follow this (and did well before I knew of Robert Fripp), and when I don't, I end up putting my foot in my mouth - proving the theory that it's better just to listen!